Posted on 06/09/2005 3:30:37 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
Hey Tiger I got better idea tell South Korea prez if you were Prez by early next week our US troops would be outta there How you like those apples
if President Roh would probably said COOL
What if we left?I think we should get out of SK,but give them a set period of time(?)to get their armed forces capable of defending against the North.From what i understand NK has a numerical advantage,while the South is more modern and well trained.Same for Japan.I'd also include Germany as well.The USSR is kaput,so why are we still there?I don't think when our troops were initialy deployed overseas,that it was meant to be permenant.
Good. That will prevent wacky kids from being produced.
LOL....maybe, but in the western corridor during 74-75, "mi an ham ni da" meant soooooo solly, veddy veddy solly...in GI-speak, anyway. (I was NCOIC of the 2d Inf Div ER @ Camp Casey)
Don't warn, just pull them, Korea was the first war we weren't allowed to win, we've been paying an excessive price ever since and North Korean and Chinese nuclear belligerence is all we have to show for it. The status quo is a substitute for victory and everybody knows, there is no substitute for victory.
They always do.
Yep, but unfortunately, they are rarely the ones who suffer the result. It's the millions who voted them in who suffer.
Fine. Let those boys defend their own country for a change. In this day and age - a waste for our guys to be there anyway.
Can you tell us a little about yourself? Your profile page is blank.
they would be shaking in there boots if we leave which i would love to do.....screw them and there protesters....let them eat some of that tasty north korean tree bark! yum yum
Hope that official stopped in Germany on the way back.
ruh roh.....
The only reason So. Korea cares about it is because they want the income!
Not directly from U.S. installations. There are some they can earn. The real money loss comes the almost certain prospect that (ground)troop withdrawal would seriously spook local business climate, which will lead to further economic deterioration. Those with money would not trust Roh's regime, not Kim Jong-il's "peace-loving" way.
From N. Korean point of view, the presence of U.S. troops has some comforting benefits as well. It means that they still have as "hostages" S. Korea or U.S. troops. If (ground)troops go, it would mean that U.S. care much less about "S. Korean hostages" and no real U.S. hostages in S. Korea. It would drastically raise the possibility that N. Korea would be a free-fire zone, because America could resort to more drastic options.
I think that, if Korean situation really worsens, the first thing to happen would be a sudden American (ground) troop withdrawal. I am not sure what they will do with airbases in Osan and Kunsan. They might keep it with reduced presence.
Maybe so but Taiwan does need our protection.
Your friend should warn you instead on the dangers of crass, over-generalization!! :-)
Is your testimony that the photo is a Korean Girl????? I doubt it.
It sounds as if this is related to U.S. plans discussed last year. Our fixed positioning at the DMZ basically makes our troops hostages. The original idea was that it was a guarantee to South Korea. If North Korea invaded and killed our troops, we would be certain to respond.
But the tripwire strategy, always somewhat questionable, makes no sense now. We need to be able to bomb North Korea's nuclear facilities if necessary, and in order to do that we need to get our troops out of the DMZ and into a more flexible and defensible posture first.
Unfortunately, Seoul is pretty near the DMZ and difficult to defend from invasion. Well, that's too bad. We have to play to win.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.